On TechRepublic: Why Android beats iPhone
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

December 4th, 2008

Clearing up the 32/64-bit memory limit confusion

Posted by Adrian Kingsley-Hughes @ 10:06 am

Categories: Tech Mythbusting

Tags: 32-bit, RAM, Dwight, Memory, Semiconductors, Hardware, Components, Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Today Dwight Silverman ran a great piece on TechBlog which examines whether folks buying a new PC are best sticking with 32-bit Vista or making the leap to 64-bit Vista. It’s a good piece but there’s one bit that I feel deserves some clarification.

Dwight says:

Vista x64 can use more memory than the 32-bit version, which is limited to 4 gigabytes.

The problem with this statement is that it gives the impression that the cut off point when it comes to memory lies at the 4GB mark. Less memory than this and you’re fine with 32-bit, but any more memory and you need a 64-bit OS to make advantage of it. The confusion arises because people take the term memory to mean RAM, and this can lead to some expensive mistakes as people buy PCs loaded with 4GB or RAM and a 32-bit OS, only to later realize they can’t make use of all the RAM they bought.

The 4GB limit refers to total addressable memory space and not just the RAM installed. It’s a total made up of system RAM, graphics RAM, PCI memory range, ACPI and a few other bits and pieces. And if you think that your system RAM is the only significant factor, think again. You can buy graphics cards fitted with 1GB or RAM, and if you wanted (and had the spare cash!) you could fit three of these into a system. There’s not a 1 to 1 relationship between graphics memeory consuming system RAM, but the larger the memory, the more the card sets aside for itself. Now that 4GB limit doesn’t leave you a lot of space for system RAM. For more information, check out an excellent post by tech guru Mark Russinovich. Here’s a small extract from Mark’s blog:

The consumption of memory addresses below 4GB can be drastic on high-end gaming systems with large video cards. For example, I purchased one from a boutique gaming rig company that came with 4GB of RAM and two 1GB video cards. I hadn’t specified the OS version and assumed that they’d put 64-bit Vista on it, but it came with the 32-bit version and as a result only 2.2GB of the memory was accessible by Windows. You can see a giant memory hole from 8FEF0000 to FFFFFFFF in this Meminfo output from the system after I installed 64-bit Windows.

Note: Wondering how we arrive at that 4GB limit? Here’s the math for 32-bit systems:

232 = 4,294,967,296 bytes
4,294,967,296 / (1,024 x 1,024) = 4,096 MB = 4GB

It’s different for 64-bit:

264 = 18,446,744,073,709,551,616
18,446,744,073,709,551,616 / (1,024 x 1,024) = 16EB (exabytes)

On system fitted with 4GB or RAM and a modest graphics card with 512MB of on-board memory the end user normally sees about 3GB of installed system RAM. So what this means is that the realistic upper RAM limit for a 32-bit OS is more like 3GB. If you’re adding big graphics cards with larger amounts of RAM (or using Crossfire or SLI) then you’ll need to be seriously thinking about a 64-bit OS much sooner.

Dwight’s also posted his Holiday PC spec list, which is also a good read. My only complaint there is that I think that Dwight is being too agnostic when it comes to recommending CPUs, especially at the power user end of the spectrum - the AMD’s Phenom really doesn’t belong in the same list as Intel’s powerhouse CPU, the Core i7. Dwight also suggests Intel Celeron CPUs at the lower end, something which I would now avoid.

Adrian Kingsley-HughesAdrian is a technology journalist and author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology. He also runs a popular blog called The PC Doctor. See his full profile and disclosure of his industry affiliations

Want to get in touch? Got a tip? Feel free to drop me a note! I ALWAYS respect anonymity. I'm also on Twitter (@the_pc_doc)

Right to Reply: Should any industry representatives wish to comment on any posts on Hardware 2.0, I will be happy to publish their reply verbatim on this blog.

Subscribe to Hardware 2.0 via Email alerts or RSS.

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 46 Talkback(s)
the AMD???s Phenom really doesn???t belong in the same list as Intel???s
The AMD?s Phenom really doesn?t belong in the same list as Intel?s powerhouse CPU ! Really ?? Why and how did you conclude this. Phenom II has beaten i7 in many benchmark, if you Google it then you w... (Read the rest)
Posted by: dotroy@... Posted on: 06/25/09 You are currently: a Guest | | Terms of Use
You might want to re-read your article.... :P  Been_Done_Before | 12/04/08
It also turns out  frgough | 12/04/08
That's a very very good point.  MrViklund | 12/04/08
How many people still refuse to upgrade the hardware  LBiege | 12/04/08
For some there's no need  Fred Fredrickson | 12/04/08
Yes  superhobo | 12/05/08
Boohoo  superhobo | 12/05/08
Don't forget PAE if talking memory.  bjbrock | 12/04/08
PAE is no help on MS consumer OS  eggmanbubbagee@... | 12/04/08
True, but...  bjbrock | 12/05/08
RE: Clearing up the 32/64-bit memory limit confusion  Bozzer | 12/04/08
64bit hardware?  ridingthewind | 12/04/08
True you need a 64-bit CPU ...  Adrian Kingsley-HughesZDNet Moderator | 12/04/08
thanks - neat gadget  ridingthewind | 12/04/08
But that's not all you need...  r_widell | 12/05/08
You don't need Ultimate.  TrackStar1682 | 12/19/08
But why 64 bit?  Dorkyman | 12/04/08
Because 64 is after 32 in powers of 2 (NT)  logicearth@... | 12/04/08
I usually max out 3GB with multiple apps...  DevJonny | 12/05/08
Why 64-bit? Makes the software easier...  rlshorter | 12/05/08
With multi-core processors, its easier to multi-task.  Species8472 | 12/05/08
Correction on your math Adrain  logicearth@... | 12/04/08
I think his math is correct.  D. W. Bierbaum | 12/05/08
No...  logicearth@... | 12/05/08
The math is correct, zero (0) is a real number  r_widell | 12/05/08
{DELETED}  logicearth@... | 12/05/08
Um, it doesn't matter how big your graphics memory is, Adrian  rlshorter | 12/05/08
Adrian's next article should correct this one  softwareFlunky | 12/05/08
question about this  eggmanbubbagee@... | 12/06/08
You're right ...  Adrian Kingsley-HughesZDNet Moderator | 12/06/08
re: Um, it doesn't matter how big your graphics memory is  dcdavy | 12/06/08
If you want to see the effect for yourself ...  Adrian Kingsley-HughesZDNet Moderator | 12/07/08
Yep - it shows exactly what I was talking about...  rlshorter | 12/08/08
graphics memory vs system memory addendum  rlshorter | 12/05/08
I may be missing something  eggmanbubbagee@... | 12/08/08
RE: Clearing up the 32/64-bit memory limit confusion  robbackus | 12/05/08
RE: Clearing up the 32/64-bit memory limit confusion  philipralban@... | 12/05/08
RE: Clearing up the 32/64-bit memory limit confusion  philipralban@... | 12/05/08
RE: Clearing up the 32/64-bit memory limit confusion  dennyc5@... | 12/05/08
64 bit Linux  Sagax- | 12/06/08
What about VM's? Does VMWare fusion  dorkiedorkfromdorktown | 12/05/08
RE: Clearing up the 32/64-bit memory limit confusion  FHDumay | 12/06/08
Umm, why does your calc show even values...?  rlshorter | 12/08/08
64 bit == good  dcdavy | 12/06/08
RE: Clearing up the 32/64-bit memory limit confusion  apexwebmaster | 04/08/09
the AMD???s Phenom really doesn???t belong in the same list as Intel???s  dotroy@... | 06/25/09

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

Click Here
advertisement
Click Here

Recent Entries

advertisement

Archives

ZDNet Blogs

White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

SmartPlanet

Click Here